Factors Influencing Implementation, Sustainability and Scalability of Healthy Food Retail Interventions: A Systematic Review of Reviews

The aim of this systematic review of reviews was to synthesise the evidence on factors influencing the implementation, sustainability and scalability of food retail interventions to improve the healthiness of food purchased by consumers. A search strategy to identify reviews published up until June 2020 was applied to four databases. The Risk of Bias in Systematic Review tool was used. Review findings were synthesised narratively using the socio-ecological model. A total of 25 reviews met the inclusion criteria. A number of factors influenced implementation; these included retailers’ and consumers’ knowledge and preferences regarding healthy food; establishing trust and relationships; perceived consumer demand for healthy food; profitability; store infrastructure; organizational support, including resources; and enabling policies that promote health. Few reviews reported on factors influencing sustainability or scalability of the interventions. While there is a large and rapidly growing body of evidence on factors influencing implementation of interventions, more work is needed to identify factors associated with their sustainability and scalability. These findings can be used to develop implementation strategies that consider the multiple levels of influence (individual, intrapersonal and environmental) to better support implementation of healthy food retail interventions.

Family carer needs in advanced disease: systematic review of reviews

BackgroundFamily carers are vital in the management and delivery of home-based palliative care. Decision-makers need to know what the most commonly expressed unmet needs of family carers are to target available support services.AimTo identify the most commonly expressed needs of family carers of people with an advanced disease, assess the quality of current evidence, and set an agenda for future research and clinical practice.DesignA systematic review of reviews, prospectively registered on PROSPERO. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for systematic reviews and research syntheses.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Informit and Cochrane Library were searched for reviews about the needs of carers looking after patients with advanced disease from 2010 to 2020.ResultsFindings from 21 reviews identified emotional support, disease-specific knowledge, carer role responsibilities, self-care and general practical support as the most commonly expressed needs expressed by family carers. Additionally, access to professional services, formal education opportunities and communication with health professionals were identified as caregivers’ preferred ways of having these needs met. Extraction of carer-specific needs was challenging at times as results were often combined with patient results in reviews.ConclusionPractical difficulties exist in effectively resourcing services to meet the needs of family carers. Information regarding the most commonly expressed needs shared by caregivers and their preferred delivery source can provide an opportunity to focus available support services to achieve the highest possible impact for carers of patients with advanced disease.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018088678.

Current Approaches, Typologies and Predictors of Deviant Work Behaviors: A Scoping Review of Reviews

This study provides a scoping review of the recent conceptual developments about the deviant work behavior and counterproductive work behavior constructs. It also examines the specific types of deviant work behavior that have been more consistently investigated in the last decade, and whether they cover the interpersonal or organizational type of deviant behavior. In addition, individual, group, and organizational predictors of deviant work behaviors are examined. A scoping review of reviews was conducted on Scopus and Web of Science databases and 54 studies published from 2010 to June 2021 were taken into account. Results show that more recent conceptualizations are based on well established models in the literature and consider the hierarchical structure of these two constructs. Recent reviews examine the relationships of deviant work behavior with job performance and ethical behavior constructs, the multilevel nature of deviant work behavior, and the consequences for the actor of the deviance. The specific types of deviant work behavior more frequently reviewed in the last decade are workplace abuse, incivility, ostracism, bullying and sexual harassment, and abusive and destructive leadership; this evidence suggests a much greater attention to interpersonal, rather than organizational, forms of deviant work behavior. Regarding antecedents, results show the continuing prevalence of personality factors antecedents. Limitations of the study and theoretical and practical implications for the field are also provided.

Emerging investigator series: Microplastics Sources, Fate, Toxicity, Detection, and Interactions with Micropollutants in Aquatic Ecosystems – A Review of Reviews

Hundreds of review studies have been published focusing on microplastics (MPs) and their environmental impacts. With the microbiota colonization of MPs being firmly established, MPs became an important carrier for...

Systematic Reviews of Systematic Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Studies Reviews in Healthcare Research: How to Assess the Methodological Quality of Included Reviews?

Conducting a review of systematic reviews can be challenging, especially when combining systematic quantitative, qualitative and mixed studies reviews. In this methodological discussion paper, we propose (a) a typology for categorizing various types of review of reviews and (b) an exploration of criteria pertaining to three existing critical appraisal tools (ROBIS, AMSTAR 2, and MMSR) to identify those that could be adapted for qualitative and mixed studies reviews. Further work has to be done to develop methodological guidance in conducting, interpreting, and reporting reviews of reviews that combine qualitative and quantitative data.